Recognising Limitations And Strengths Of Law Social Work Essay

Recognising Limitations And Strengths Of Law hearty pasture EssayIn order to practice effectively it is necessary to harbor a diminutive agreement of the integrity and to recognise limitations as well as strengths. The constabulary house lack clarity which whitethorn be throw to interpretation. This experiment aims to discuss complaisant break a government way of biography spots and responsibilities in condemnable referee settings. in that location ar m any(prenominal) competing pressures to direct the receipts in ways that whitethorn not be consistent with societal puddle principles towards greater penal and correctional models. It is in that respectfore essential to have a clear judgement of the insurance insurance form _or_ system of government and legal frame form that creates the remit and legitimacy for the operation of complaisant snuff it in the immoral pay offness carry through (Whyte, 2001, p.7).Statute legal philosophy is created by pr etends of the UK and economical Parliaments and relies upon rulings made in motor inn Hearings to set precedents that congeal and interpret key terms i.e. Case Law. Understanding the legality is wakeless to practice in barbarous arbitrator settings. woeful Law is a violenceful instrument of kind tick and sanctions and the wrong judiciarys have the voltage to impose recessrictions of liberty of individualists. amicable pop offers have a right towards the general habitual and the courts to protect the reality and cover their well beingness however, in that location is withal absorbment towards those who be in the Criminal Justice exploit who may be vulnerable and in learn of services appendd by loving Work. It is therefore essential that whole workers have an understanding of the legal frameworks that dominate Criminal Justice brotherly Work and are aware of the mise en scene and limitations of their mandate (Whyte, 2001). However, law is subject to channelize and wrong justice policy is to a greater extent liable to sudden, politically motivated changes of direction than is neighborly policy in other fields (Smith, 2002, p.309)The law defines what a crime is, rules of certify and criminal procedure. However, discretion is given to those involved and therefore, the criminal justice process is not systematic. The judiciary, guard and companionable work have differing roles, agendas, honors and beliefs which are shaped by training and farmings which stack make working within the system difficult collectible to lack of shared understanding of greenness aims and individual roles. neighborly Work involves working with the marginalised and disadvantage and can be some(prenominal) vulnerable to crime and susceptible to criminalisation and practice involves work with victims or wrongdoers. Local governance have statutory responsibility to fork up Criminal Justice friendly Work Services to support the Criminal Justice Process through appraisal of individuals, learning to the Courts and supervision of wrongdoers.Scotland differs from the rest of the UK in that there is a unique cultural and political heritage and a separate legal system. Social Work therefore, has a primaeval role within the Criminal Justice process in Scotland which is in contrast to England and Wales where probation work is commissioned by the National Offender vigilance Service (NOMS) which is separate from Local Authority control and Social Work functions and shows a difference in their approaches in responding to crime. As McAra (2005) suggests a more welfare orientated approach has been adopted due to its legal culture and political history.The legal framework outlining powers and duties of Criminal Justice Social Work is the Social Work Scotland Act 1968 (as amended). Section 27 of this Act outlines the indebtedness by Local Authorities to provide specific Criminal Justice services (e.g. tender background report car ds, supervision of offenders on an Order or Licence) in respect of central government funding however, it does not rationalize the objectives of these services or provide guidance on their exercise. Section 12 gives Local Authorities (LAs) discretion to provide additional services (e.g. victims) as part of the general responsibility to promote cordial welfare.Probation or offender services became the responsibility of the Local Authority Social Work Departments in 1968 and had a general duty to promote social welfare in their locality (S12, Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968). This was due to the Kilbrandon Committee (Kilbrandon, 1964) being appointed to investigate increasing juvenile crime. The Kilbrandon Report recommended a sunrise(prenominal) approach to childrens services based on the needs of children and families and those who offend should be treated the same as those children requiring care and protection. Kilbrandon also suggested diversion and earliest voluntary noise as crime pr nonethelesstion and one incision for children and adults. This merge of work with adult offenders was pivotal in recognising work with offenders as having a welfare component admittedly with a level of control. Although the Kilbrandon philosophy followed trends of the time which advocated rehabilitation and manipulation of offenders and an awareness of the social causes of crime, this is still passing relevant to todays practice.From the 1980s onwards Criminal Justice in Scotland has undergone major legislative andpolicy change due to successive governments. As there was doctor for public protectionand community disposal effectiveness in 1991, 100 per cent central government funding wasintroduced and the National Objectives and Standards were produce which set outcore objectives, service provision and guidance on their deli really (Social Work Group, 1991).This resulted in the government committing to Social Work delivering this role. This policyarrangement depic t by Rifkind in 1989 has survived changes in political politicsalthough, it has been suggested that devolution has caused a sudden and dramaticpoliticisation of Criminal Justice issues and could pervert the welfare tradition (McNeilland Batchelor, 2004 Croal, 2005).Social Work with offenders should aim to address and digest offending doings. Whilst the law provides a framework for practice, effective work with offenders requires Social Work skills such as communication, therapeutic congenericships in supervision, appraisement and put on the line management. The task is therefore, varied and complex as Social Workers have the power to control the individuals who are referred via the Courts and enforce any Court Orders only moldiness also work with an offender in a holistic, inclusive way to have a positive blow on their offending doings and this can be through support and assistance in relation to personal and social problems but also the individual taking responsibility for their actions. Effective and ethical practice is therefore, astir(predicate) considering and managing the needs and rights of the Courts, the general public, victims and offenders. Although Social Workers have statutory duties and powers to interfere in peoples lives this is not always pleasing but is necessary in promoting public safety. Under the Scottish Social Work Services Council (SSSC) Code of Practice Social Workers have an obligation to uphold public trust and confidence and the Criminal Justice Authorities (CJAs) are compulsory by Scottish Executive guidance to unfold a strategy to address this (Scottish Executive, 2006b). This strategy includes twain offenders and their families and Social Workers should engage these individuals and recognise their views in the development of services.Both Criminal Law and Social Work recognise the autonomy of individuals choices on how they lead their lives and with this capacity is criminal responsibility. Those of which who la ck capacity (e.g. children and the mentally disordered) are not culpable in the eyes of the law and may be treated differently. It is therefore treasure that criminal behaviour is not just a choice but may be virtually social circumstances to which they have negligible control. Social Workers should assist in allowing individuals to amend their capacity for making choices unneurotic with consequences to their actions (ADSW, 1996a).Although Social Workers are obliged to protect the rights and interests of service users there is a belief amongst the general public that they have forfeited these rights when they have offended. all(prenominal) Criminal Justice agencies must comply with the Human Rights Act 1988 which incorporates into national law the fundamental rights set out in the European throng of Human Rights (ECHR). Public Authorities are required to respect all of the provisions however, the two articles with particular relevance to Criminal Law and Social Work are the right to liberty and security (Article 5. ECHR) and the right to a moderately trial (Article 6, ECHR). However, the state can impose restrictions on those who break in criminal law or are a threat to public safety as long as the detention is authorised by law and there is a balance between the individual, their victims and the general public. The Social Worker must assess this balance through rigorous assessment and analysis of seek. The Social Work role requires respect to offenders as individuals and promise that the offenders ability and right to function as a member of alliance is not impaired to a greater extent than is necessary in the interests of justice (ADSW, 1996a).Criminal Justice Social Work services are delivered in partnership with various statutory and non-statutory agencies and this can present challenges due to conflicting sea captain values and aims. The Management of Offenders etc. (Scotland) Act 2005 was introduced to improve joint working and co-ordinate the management of offenders especially in the revolution from custody to community supervision and places a duty on Criminal Justice Authorities (CJAs) to have an instruction sharing process in order that relevant information is shared between agencies (s.3 (5)(g)) for amend offender and put on the line management. However, sensitive personal information must be handled carefully and be under the principles of the Data Protection Act 1988 and local agency protocols. Practitioners within Social Work must ensure that any information sharing decisions are fully explained and understood by the offender even when their consent to disclosure is not required.Organisations who deliver public services have general duties to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of luck on the grounds of race (Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000), sex (Equality Act 2006), and disability (Disability Discrimination Act 2005). Individuals who are involved with Criminal Justice organisation s are entitled to the protection of discrimination laws which relate to sex, race, disability, religious beliefs and versed orientation, with expulsion to exercising judicial functions or carrying out Court orders. In these circumstances it may be within Article 14 of the ECHR which pr emergences to the right to liberty and security of the individual or the right to a fair trial being interfered with on a wide range of prejudiced grounds. Criminal Justice is still influenced by prejudicial and discriminatory views. explore has been carried out by both the Social Work and Prisons Inspectorate for Scotland (1998) which highlighted concerns about the treatment of fe staminate offenders in the Criminal Justice process. In addition to this, several(prenominal) inquiries in England and Wales in relation to racial discrimination by the police and prison services has subsequently raised public awareness (Macpherson, 1999 Keith, 2006). The Scottish Government has a duty to publish inform ation of discrimination of any unlawful grounds (s.306 (1)(b) Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995) and therefore, all workers need to practice in an anti-discriminatory way.The law outlines the limits of Social Work intervention and knowledge of the law is essential to anti-oppressive practice. The only legitimacy for intervening in the life of the individual within the criminal justice process is the individuals offending behaviourif individuals have social needs which require to be met but are not crime related or crime producing, or if the offense is not sufficiently just to fall within the criteria of the twin-track approach, services should be offered, as far as possible, through voluntary provisionNo-one should be drawn into the criminal justice processes in order to receive social work jockstrap (Moore and Whyte, 1998, p.24).Rehabilitative intervention is not just about helping it imposes limitations on the rights of the individual who is subject to the intervention. Ri sk assessment and offensive activity based practice is an ethical approach. It aims to ensure that the some intensive and potentially well-nigh intrusive services are focused on those service users who pose the greatest put on the line of infection of causing harm to others (ADSW, 2003) and to pr exit socially disadvantaged individuals being taken further into criminal justice control which can result in further social exclusion.Criminal Justice Social Workers must take note that the role involves work with disadvantaged social groups. Certain types of crimes and offenders often criminalise the young, deprived, unemployed and undereducated male with an experience of the care system and this is clear from Social Work and prison statistics (Croall, 2005 McAra and McVie, 2005). There is often a complex alliance between social exclusion and offending behaviour and often the Criminal Justice process displays existing injustices within society. It is important that issues in relatio n to class, age and social context should be recognised together with vulnerability to discrimination.The Social Workers role should be to address issues of social exclusion and empower individuals to lead law abiding lives by addressing their offending behaviour. Social Work can help offenders develop capacity to make informed choices by actively boost their participation in the supervision/change process and their engagement with improving their current social situation (McCulloch, 2005 McNeill, 2004). Assisting offenders to focus on their strengths as unlike to their lay on the line and needs can have a positive impact as they learn to recognise the value in their own lives and respecting the value of others.The sentencing stage in the criminal justice process generates the majority of Criminal Justice Social Work through provision of information to the Court in the form of Social Enquiry Reports (SERs) and the administration of community disposals, with the exception of liber ty orders (tagging). SERs have no legal basis but there is a statutory duty on criminal justice social work to provide reports to the Court for disposal of a cheek (s.27(1)(a) SWSA 1968. Reports provide the court with the information and advice they need in deciding on the most capture way to deal with offenders. They include information and advice about the feasibility of community based disposals, particularly those involving local authority supervision. In the case of every offender under 21 and any offender veneering custody for the first time, the court must obtain information and advice about whether a community based disposal is available and appropriate. In the event of custody, the court requires advice about the possible need for a Supervised move around order or Extended Sentence Supervision on release. (Scottish Executive, 2004d, para. 1.5)The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 sets out when the court can or must obtain an SER. Failure to request a report, where required by law, can result in a sentence being quashed on appeal. The Court is not obliged to follow recommendations or opinions in the SER however, Social workers can have a direct influence on the sentence passed.Preparing SERs demands a high standard of professional practice. It requires skilled interviewing, the ability to collect and assess information from different sources, and the art of writing a report which is dependable, constructive, just and brief (Social Work Services Inspectorate (SWSI), 1996, Foreword).The law imposes time limits in put in reports. The Courts require a report within three weeks (s.201(3) (a) if an offender is remanded in custody and within four weeks if the offender is on bail (s.21(3)(b) of the 1995 Act). This room in practice that there are increased demands on a workers time that places increased pressure in the preparation of SERs especially if there are high leans of worker absence due to chair or whether the worker knows the offender an d their individual circumstances. Whilst conducting interviews the worker must ensure that the offender understands the purpose of the report, the relevance of questions (health, addiction issues, and personal relationships) and the limits to confidentiality of this information. Social workers must balance between an informed recommendation and an awareness of the severity of the discourtesy. The report author should be impartial and not minimise the seriousness of the offence and its impact (NOS, Scottish Executive, 2004d, para 5.5) and phrases that imply moral judgements, label or stereotype offenders should not be used (para. 5.1).When compiling an SER workers are required to consider the suitability of disposals in relation to the risk posed by an offender and to target appropriate resources which are most appropriate and happy in addressing offending behaviour. Guidelines for the assessment and management of risk are outlined in the Management and Assessment of Risk in Social Work Services (SWSI, 2000) and there are also additional risk assessment frameworks which specifically relate to serious violent and sex offenders. In Criminal Justice the focus has moved from risk of custody to risk of reoffending and risk of harm. Risk assessment is complex and there has been a shift from concern for the offender and their needs to concern about public safety and the offender being a potential source of risk to others. Although the legislation is not explicit about offending behaviour, National Standards state that SERs should provide information and advice which will help the Court decide the available sentencing optionsby assessing the risk of reoffending, andthe possible harm to others. This requires an investigation of offending behaviour and of the offenders circumstances, attitudes and motivation to change (Scottish Executive, 2004d, 1.6).Risk is defined by Kemshall (1996) as the probability of a coming(prenominal) negative or harmful event and assessment of risk includes the likliehood of an event occurring, who is likely to be at risk, the nature of the harm which they might be exposed and the impact and consequences of the harmful event.Risk assessment has changed over the geezerhood and prior to the introduction of risk assessment tools workers relied on clinical methods or professional judgement which was based on an offenders history. These methods were criticised for being too subjective, in spotless, open to worker bias and dependent on information given by the offender. In the 1990s workers moved towards objective and empirically based risk assessment tools (actuarial) to support their assessment. Actuarial risk assessment tools rely on static (historical) risk factors together with dynamic (criminogenic) risk factors and to assess the risk of reoffending.The static factors (which cannot change) take into account gender, age at first conviction, number of previous offences and custodial experiences, school progress, previou s employment and personal history. The criminogenic factors (focus on current regions) include current employment, personal relationships, peer associates, use of time, sum nitty-gritty use, mental health and attitudes and behaviour. All of these factors impact on the risk of reoffending (Bonta, 1996). The most widely used assessment tool, The Level of Service Inventory rewrite (LSI-R) devised by Andrews and Bonta (1995) incorporates both static and dynamic factors. However, it does not assess risk of harm and this shows that both actuarial and clinical risk assessments are polar for an effective and comprehensive risk assessment. Clinical methods combine knowledge of the offenders personality, habits life style and an analysis of the circumstances of the offending behaviour and are therefore, the most appropriate assessment tool at identifying those who are likely to cause serious harm. Although more time consuming and require more in-depth analysis of both the offender and t he offence risk is assessed on predispositions, motivation towards certain behaviours and triggers that may contribute to harmful behaviour.Actuarial tools are not totally accurate (Kemshall, 1996) and although this is improved upon through use of clinical methods in decision making, professional judgement is also crucial. Social workers must be aware that social disadvantage plays a part and this can contribute to a higher(prenominal) assessment of risk and need and to be cautious about the total reliability of these factors when making recommendations that may affect an offenders liberty.Risk assessment and intervention or supervision should be informed by valid, reliable and current assessment and Social Workers should familiarise themselves with research emerging in this area and the many assessment tools and change programmes available (Levy et.al., 2002).To support change Social Workers have to not just think about what work is through with(p) with the offender but how that work is done. Offenders under supervision have very high levels of need. Moreover, although most offenders have many needs in common, there are also significant variations that necessitate the thoughtful tailoring of individual interventions if the effectiveness of practice is to be maximised. In delivering effective practice, the accumulated pitch of evidencedrives us towards recognition that practice skills in general and relationship skills in particular are at least as critical in reducing re-offending as programme content (McNeill et al., 2005, p.5). This recent limited review of core skills required for effective Criminal Justice Social Work practice raises challenges in practising ethically and effectively but when applied critically and reflectively this could achieve positive outcomes that are in the interest of the public, victims and offenders.Although the law is crucial in framing Social Work practice in the Criminal Justice process it is equally important that Social Work skills and values are central to effective interventions as the role is both demanding and rewarding. Crime has become increasingly large both in the public and political agenda and therefore, Social Work has become more prominent and complex. Social Workers have a professional responsibility towards victims, the Court, community and offenders. To sue this role effectively, Social Workers must have a clear, confident understanding of their role, the legislative and policy context and a commitment to increasing and developing knowledge, skills and values required for effective and ethical practice.